Introduction
The purpose of the study is to study the resilience factors affecting the lives and safety of Young Black gay/bisexual men (YBGBM) in New York City. In order to gain a better understanding of the resilience factors, diverse profiles are explored in the study among 228 YBGBM comparing profiles on psychological factors, including psychological distress and mental health, among others (Wilson et al., 2016). In turn, the latter confirms that resilience consists of multidimensional support and construct and that among the YBGBM, resilience patterns are exceptionally diverse.
Literature Review
The authors offer enough evidence in their review of the literature on the importance of the study of psychology as a field. This is evident in the introduction, the authors introduce the range of adverse physical and psychological health outcomes affecting YBGBM through a review of literature by four scholars, namely, Millett, Flores, Peterson, and Bakeman (2007) (as cited in Wilson et al. (2016)); and Millett et al. (2012) (as cited in Wilson et al. (2016)). Further in the introduction, the authors not only provide a generalized view of scholars but proceed to discuss various scholars with great precision while also acknowledging diverse views and identifying gaps. A good example of the broad approach to identifying gaps is where the authors define resilience as a nebulous concept with no sole agreed-upon definition, and the operation of resilience can be explored variedly (Wilson et al., 2016). Such approaches to literature indicate the authors’ provision of adequate support on the importance of the study via a review of the literature.
Theories
In the conceptualization of the study, the authors have incorporated various theories. Specifically, they have commenced with Masten’s conceptualization of resilience. The specified framework informed the researchers’ understanding of resilience as a phenomenon that is characterized by positive outcomes despite the presence of grave threats to development or adaptation. The study then proceeds to offer psychological research theories, which are inputs as a model, and how they conceptualize resilience. In the paper, three models have been offered the compensatory, protective, and challenge models (Wilson et al., 2016). Lastly, resilience examination has been offered as operationalized by research studies in terms of assets.
Reason and Rationale of the Study
The reason and rationale of the study are to understand the concept of resilience among YBGBM, and how they can handle the contextual stressors that are a threat to their health and well-being. These stressors comprise minority stress and syndetic conditions that lead to stigma and low levels of social and personal responses among the YBGMB (Wilson et al., 2016). Important resilient factors are identified, including the linked constructs of hardiness, self-efficacy, social support, and adaptive coping, which are further discussed.
Design, Methods, and Sampling
In order to adequately explore profiles of resilience factors among the Young Black gay/bisexual men (YBGBM) in New York City, the Brother Connect study (BCS) was developed as a multi-method design project. Various methods were used to recruit interested participants between 2010 and 2011 (Wilson et al., 2016). This includes community events and nightclub face-to-face recruitments, fliers in community-based organizations, participant referrals, online ads on social media, and hookup websites. The study explored a combination of snowball and convenience sampling. The observed conclusions can be deduced from the fact that participants demonstrated eligibility after meeting certain inclusion criteria, such as being Black and male, among others.
Culture and Diversity in Methodology
In the study methods, it is clear that culture and diversity form key components of the eligibility criteria. Particularly, the eligibility criteria entail that the participants of the study ought to be African-American, Black, mixed race, Black Hispanic, west/Caribbean, or of African American ethnicity (Wilson et al., 2016). The fact that study methods consider culture and development means that the data was thoroughly and meticulously examined, leading to an insightful analysis thereof.
Measures/Instrument Utilized: Reliability and Validity
The authors discussed the reliability and validity of the instruments utilized in the study, yet their discussion was not sufficient. The discussion on reliability is evident in their discussion of resilience and psychosocial factors. As far as resilience factors are concerned, the mastery scale, particularly the PSS-Fa reliability, has been ascribed to the fact that it has been broadly used with the adult population and in young Black men studies. Regarding psychosocial factors, the Kesseler-10 scale’s (k-10) validity and reliability have been justified by the fact that the scale has been widely utilized in adult and youth studies and is broadly authorized (Wilson et al., 2016). The Brief Symptoms Inventory Scale (BSI) has also been employed extensively. The discussion is not sufficient as it fails to justify the authenticity of the instruments and measures used in demographic and health-related information.
Results
The study’s main results indicate resilience as a multidimensional concept and support the view that YBGBM has diverse resilience patterns. The specified outcome is evident from the cluster analysis, which strongly suggests that a single manner in which resilience works out amongst the YBGBM does not exist. Certain men, particularly those of younger age, may have greater resilience as a direct effect of specific personality characteristics, particularly self-efficacy (Wilson et al., 2016). However, in other members of the target population, resilience may be cultivated by using socio-contextual resources as the means of ensuring their further protection from stress and the risks of exposure to specific hostile environments.
Results Generalizability
The results of the study are highly generalizable, which is mainly evident from the fact that they can be confined to a statement. Remarkably, the study is sufficiently broad, involving a diversity of inferences, for example, the identification of YBGBM profiles ranging from the least resilient to the fourth, which is the most resilient. From each example, important characteristics can be deduced, such as the example of the young man in profile 2, who has adaptive skins and self-efficacy labels that are close to average. In comparison, profile 3 has a traditional type of resilience (Wilson et al., 2016). Each profile has its diversity, all leading to a single finding, which was useful in developing a supportive, resilience-building framework for other YBGBM communities even outside New York.
Ease of Understanding: Tables and Figures
The tables and figures in the study might seem hard to understand, yet this challenge is overcome by the fact that the authors proceed to explain each. A good example to illustrate this would be Figure One, where one might find it difficult to identify what specific numbers such as 24.8 denote. However, by proceeding to read the results, one will realize that the findings are linked to time and that this number indicates that the YBGBM sample was 24.8 years old (Wilson et al., 2016). Reading the results further sheds more light on the data on each figure and table, which contributes to a better understanding of what information each is supposed to convey.
Confounding Variables in the Study Design
Confounding variables are present in the study design, where one variable leads to a conclusion that may offer an alternative explanation. This is evident in the discussion, where the authors discuss limitations. They found that high resilience factor levels were theorized to be linked to low psychosocial risk levels. However, further research is needed to examine if the factors identified in the course of research offer YBGBM increased protection (Wilson et al., 2016). Nonetheless, it is important to note that the confounding variables are not numerous, and even the one that is evident requires some form of critical analysis to be identified as one.
Limitations of the Study Not Mentioned by the Authors
Some limitations of the ones that the author does not mention in the study include social desirability bias and lack of diversity. As far as social desirability bias is concerned, the YBGBM population might find it hard to disclose information that is sensitive, which is especially the case if they fear negative judgment or consequences, particularly during the interviews. Regarding sampling bias, discrimination and stigma of YBGBM may make it challenging to recruit samples to take part in the study.
Strength of the Study not Stated by Authors
Some of the study’s strengths that the author has not stated include the study advancing social justice and addressing imperative social misses. In advancing social justice, the study explores a critical area in YBGBM issues and can be used to inform interventions and policies that promote equality and social justice for the communities (Wilson et al., 2016). As far as addressing an imperative issue is concerned, the study offers crucial insights into the needs and experiences of a population that has been marginalized historically.
Conclusion
Overall, the study appears to be credible and trustworthy, thus, representing an important contribution to the current range of information on the subject matter. The article offers a solid theoretical foundation based on which core conclusions are made in a logical and rational manner. Thus, the outcomes of the study inform further strategies that should be developed and introduced to manage the needs of YBGBM, particularly in regard to their safety and resilience.
Reference
Wilson, P. A., Meyer, I. H., Antebi‐Gruszka, N., Boone, M. R., Cook, S. H., & Cherenack, E. M. (2016). Profiles of resilience and psychosocial outcomes among young black gay and bisexual men. American Journal of Community Psychology, 57(1-2), 144-157. Web.